With BristolBear on this one, though not off any actual evidence having only checked cricinfo. Seemed like they were ahead of the game from when Burgess and Pandya locked in until the last ten overs. It was perhaps more clear from looking at the card how messed up the bowling allocation was with the precise split of Rhodes and Yates plus all the bowlers finishing on one over spells. Might have been a gamble that didn't come off but perhaps Rhodes needed more overs earlier on.

In strict isolation I probably just agree with the decisions to allow Stone and Hose to leave. With Hose, he was never going to play red ball again, limited value if the One Day cup is development and was patchy in T20 - though he has had a good season. The crucial thing is how are we going to replace him? Mouseley the full-time #5 in T20 with Benjamin at #6? Assume that means Hain at 4, Davies, Bethell and Mo up top.

Idling to myself at what point Warks become favourites for this? Bat into tomorrow and Surrey could have 220+ in limited overs. This is jinxing behaviour though, so I put it out as a counter-jinx the collapse is immenent. Which is as likely.

Wondered if he was injured - but seems to be batting now...

Highveld wrote:

A very good comentary team today, including Richard Wilford and the excellent Jeremy Coney.

Overton has a hand injury.

Anyone got any insight on why JOverton hasn't batted yet? Got some good runs in the test recently...

Some good comments here. Overall I think we were fortunate last year. Woakes came back at a crucial time, Norwell was fit and taking wickets and Miles and Briggs were both playing at their best. That hasn't happened this year. The strategy has been the same. Bat slow and be hard to beat, then pick up wins when the bowling comes together.

I developed the thought at the start of the year that the bowling had become poor but it seems its throughout the side, there are weaknesses all the way through. I don't think better coaching will automatically fix this - so hard to correct.

Finally, replacing Bresnan. Interesting as I virtually never see games and can't see the galvanising effect he had. My view is his retirement was partially due to the racism at Yorkshire. If he does get implicated there it becomes our problem if he is still employed by Warwickshire - for several reasons. Have to see how that ends.

Good to see we've given a chance to a Brummie lad who came through our acedemy. Since the initial lead and since Sibley has decided to leave Inthink it's actually the red ball (pay-per-play) I'm interested in. Yates presumably moves to open, after he gets over his sophomoric blues this year, great. We need a three which Mo has done for donkeys in CC. For the Blast next year where does he bat? Open in place of Stirling?

A lot of us mentioned earlier in the year that McAndrew was the Tim Bresnan replacement (who in turn I guess was the Ricky Clark replacement) so Barnard is the McAndrew replacement. Good bit of business, means we can focus on a left arm pace bowler as our overseas next year.

Yah, anything I said about batting long for the draw is independent of negative mindset and I agree with that. Of course the Clarion Call from Bwn Stokes yesterday is going to change all that.

meashambear wrote:

Poor stuff from us in this match injuries or otherwise.

We have scored so slowly that the 2nd new ball could easily dismantle the rest of our batting without us getting close to avoiding the follow on.

Negative mindset that has made for a turgid performance. The more balls you face, the more chance there is of getting out.

Northants are a very average side indeed but we are making them look pretty good.

I have an analyst pal who I think is just now starting to get paid for his work. Start of the season he was down on Warwickshire but he did make a point about the Bears being difficult to beat. As points for a draw have gradually increased, bonus points have become less important. Getting 400 off 110, therefore, is less important than batting time and taking a defeat out of the game, which does seem our plan B.

All well and good, this worked for us last season when we drew games we could have lost, until Norwell and Woakes came back in the Autumn, got wickets, and we won the crucial games. It's dull for the majority of the time though. I have just watched about four overs at lunch and seen two singles. Not going to rush back to it...

That's the most significant comment I think. First choice bowling attack all injured. I'm not sure quite how badly Hain and Briggs are but if they need a game to recuperate dor it would be this one.

GerryShedd wrote:

Hain, Briggs, Norwell, Stone, Woakes, Sidebottom - that's half a team, all of whom (except Sidebottom) would get in on merit if fit.
I hope that some of the injuries (Hain and Briggs in particular) are relatively minor and maybe an indication that the club is prioritising having them fit for the final T20 group matches. I wouldn't normally want T20 put ahead of red ball cricket but I guess the Blast is the Club's best hope of success this season.

We have been here before, I remember there being loads of press when we wanted to sign Buttler and Nick Compton a while back and it seemed we were outbid. As to these three, My initial thought was I thought it was a shame we couldn't bring through our own players, but of course one of them we have. Saqib I think has Birmingham connections too.

I'm not sure what Sibley's motivation is for leaving. Article behind the payroll... If I was Stone I'd want to have one more crack at red ball cricket so I think we'll see a bit more of him long form.

Was definitely a regular-season game. If the rosters at the time were one or two higher and there were less than 12 pitchers in them, which was distinctly possible, that could account for it.

And I'm with you on the comparison with franchise cricket and MLB or Japanese baseball. The food and beer for sure.

Highveld wrote:

It may have been an exhibition game of Japanese league game.
The majority of the position players are in action everyday.

There are some tactical substitutions, but the rules about replacing pitchers has changed which reduces the substitutions a lot.
Baseball is a very enjoyable sport to watch, definately better than, almost all, franchise cricket.
The stadiums are very good, and ticket prices are reasonable.

Good to know. So realistically only three non-pitchers switched per game? I swear I saw a game when the whole side had switched at least once, but it was in Japan in 2004. Total shambles. Clear as day I can remember a pinch hitter coming on, getting a hit then being subbed for a specialist runner when on first base.

Highveld wrote:

MLB has a 162 game regular season, the active roster is 24 players, of which at least 12 are specialitist pitchers. that expands to 40 in September, to allow promising young players from the minor leagues an opportunity.

Peter Moores in the article makes the most significant point that he doesn't see it happening a lot. Have to be clear, this isn't a tactical replacement it's a decision to sacrifice a wicket so it's a lot of resources to give up.

Substitutions, which crop up around this situation, are a different matter and I think that might work. It's useful to also be aware of the situation in baseball, however. Unlimited substitutions are fine, player leaves the game when subbed off, and squads are huge for a 180 game season. If a game is dead you might see two substitutions for every position. That's bad and shortchanges spectators - it's no resemblance to what you paid to watch.

I wonder if one substitutions per team, per innings would make sense? As a neutral I actually quite like watching Mark Cosgrove bat. But his fielding isn't quite as aesthetique. Good to get the best of him without cheating.

Last two comments, mad and Gerry very pertinent. If I recall correctly it happened in the IPL recently when a stodgy batsman who was repairing a top order collapse got bogged down with a good striker to come in. Interestingly, Brathwaite was playing in that game and he said there would be more of it. He's also got an awful career record against leg spin.

Personally, I have no issue with it seeing as it had always been in the game (remember pre-season friendlies and tour games?). The batting side are penalised appropriately through losing a wicket. It might well be that this evolves into a tactical substitution of some sort allowed once in an innings. I remember the trial of substitutes about 25 years ago was deemed a failure but I'm not sure it's true to say it could never work in white ball.

Didn't need to make point 4) a comment about anything more than there was a poor announcer in my view. I don't think white men being discriminated against is really a big issue at the moment.

paulbear wrote:

1) Good knock from Benj who looks to be ideal for this form.
2) Great credit to Hose for just taking the sting out of the situation by pushing it about and not trying to rush the total and give Durham even more momentum.
3) It worries me that we make hard work of games like this that should be won fairly comfortably.
4) The announcer was terrible to the point where you had no idea who caught the ball, who bowled it and who the batsman was. Are we becoming like the BBC by making sure there isn't a white bloke doing any job anymore because boxes must be ticked.

Worth looking at as I think that team is a bowler or two away from being the first choice T20 side ...

Highveld wrote:

Link for Game 1 v N'hants May 24th

https://live.nvplay.com/ecb/#m17416b4b-6235-4dec-a038-4a77345cd2de

I've seen Bethell plays top order in 2nd team white ball, is he capable of doing up the order in four day? Funny how your perceptions change, last week I was against it, this week I think it's worth a shot. I was shooting the breeze with some Lancs fans on the Guardian back end of last year. They were of the opinion Davies shouldn't be opening in red ball. I have a bad feeling he moved here because we said he could open as much as he liked...

If it wasn't the fact I need to head to nursery to pick up my son if five mins I would be settling into this: OHD and Burgess, best partnership of the year, covering some dross by the previous nine wickets.